flffW^^- 


S/ 


.    <■  ti- 


'4>-^^,.. 


'  *'<-.*-■ 


,w 


^x^. 


r 


Shelf.. 


/^..Jt-?,'^?. 

PRINCETON,     N.    J. 

^iCJ6n/a//^/  Y\.  VC\VAVr(A^A  • 

Sech'on .  ^^.  -^yC^   ■/     f 

N^iimber 


> 


THE 

NATIONAL.    PREACHER. 

No.  9.  NEW-YORK,  FEBRUARY,  1832.  Vol.  6. 

SERMON  CXVm. 

By  EDWARD  D.  GRIFFIN,  D.D., 

President  of  Williams  College, 
VVILLIAMSTOWN,     MASS. 


REGENERATION  NOT  WROUGHT  BY  LIGHT. 

EzEK.  xxxvi.  26. — /  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I 
will  give  you  a  heart  of  flesh. 

"  If  I  were  as  eloquent,"  said  one,  "  as  the  Holy  Ghost,  I  could  regene- 
rate sinners  as  well  as  he ;"  implying  that  the  whole  change  is  wrought 
by  light,  with  no  power  beyond  save  that  which  conveys  truth  to  the  mind. 
A  similar  theory,  with  some  varieties,  is  spreading  itself  abroad  in  our 
country,  and  I  intend  to  devote  this  sermon  to  an  examination  of  the  new 
doctrine  ;  in  doing  which  I  shall  be  careful  to  use  terms  in  their  accustomed 
sense  and  with  all  needful  explanations. 

Man  sustains  two  relations  to  God.  He  is  a  moral  agent,  that  is,  sus- 
ceptible of  obligations,  and  he  is  dependant  on  God  for  sanctifying  impres- 
sions. In  the  former  relation  he  is  active,  in  the  latter  he  is  passive. 
These  two  relations  are  almost  entirely  independant  of  each  other.  That 
is  to  say,  we  are  none  th^  less  dependant  for  being  under  obligations  ;  and 
on  the  other  hand,  we  are  none  the  less  bound  to  believe  because  faith  is 
"  the  gift  of  God,"  and  none  tlie  less  bound  to  love  because  love  is  "  the 
fruit  of  the  Spirit."  Our  obligations  rest  on  the  faculties  of  a  rational  soul, 
unimpaired  by  our  dependance  or  our  temper.  The  only  evil  cliargeable  to 
our  dependance  is,  that  in  some  cases  disinclination  is  not  removed :  but  if 
disinclination  destroys  obligation,  there  can  be  no  sin  in  the  universe,  and 
all  punishment  is  oppression,  and  the  slightest  displeasure  at  the  murderer 
of  a  father  and  mother  is  a  prejudice.  On  the  other  hand,  whether  we 
have  a  disposition  or  only  exercises,  we  must  be  dependant  on  God  for 
holiness,  and  God  himself  cannot  help  it.  He  cannot  make  a  creature 
independent  of  himself.  He  cannot  create  another  God.  And  were  we 
independent  all  would  be  lost.  If  God  has  no  power  and  right  efficiently 
to  ensiu-e  the  holiness  of  creatures,  he  cannot  ensure  the  prosperity  of  the 
universe ;  he  cannot  ensure  the  continuance  of  heaven,  and  if  you  reach 
that  Avorld  you  are  not  certain  of  remaining  there  a  day.     He  may  be 

Vol.  VI— 9 


322  THE    NATIONAL   PKEACHER. 

disappointed  of  the  end  of  all  his  works,  and  be  as  miserable  as  he  is 
benevolent.  If  God  cannot  effectually  secure  my  holiness,  and  I  may  no« 
hope  in  him  and  pray  to  him  for  that,  I  feel  for  one  that  I  must  despair. 
I  know  I  shall  never  do  it  myself.  But  in  every  case  in  which  we  are 
dependant,  we  are  so  far  passive.  If  we  are  acted  vpon  we  are  passive. 
We  are  constantly  passive  in  receiving  life,  though  in  many  of  the  functions 
of  life  we  are  active.  In  receiving  that  influence  which  causes  either  a  right 
temper  or  right  feelings,  we  must  be  passive,  though  in  the  feelings  them- 
selves we  are  active.  This  therefore  must  be  true  whether  we  have  a 
disposition  or  only  exercises.  It  must  be  true  unless  we  are  independent, 
— unless  we  create  our  own  affections,. — unless  we  do  more  than  God 
does,  who  never  created  any  part  of  his  own  mind. 

By  regeneration  the  Scriptures  sometimes  mean  the  change  both  in  the 
temper  and  in  the  exercises  which  follow  ;  namely,  that  in  which  the  man 
is  active,  as  well  as  that  in  which  he  is  passive ;  and  perhaps  I  may  add, 
conviction  also.  Regeneration  in  this  larger  sense  is  certainly  brought 
about  by  the  instrumentahty  of  the  word.  To  this  I  refer  all  such  pas- 
sages as  these  :  "  Born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible, 
by  the  word  of  God."  "  Is  not  my  word  like  as  a  fire — and  like  a  hammer 
that  breaketh  the  rock  in  pieces  1"  But  the  old  divines  found  it  conve- 
nient to  divide  this  change,  (throwing  out  conviction,)  into  two  pans. 
That  change  in  the  temper,  antecedent  to  exercise,  which  is  produced  by 
the  Spirit,  they  called  regeneration  ;  that  change  which  consists  in  the  new 
exercises  of  the  moral  agent,  or  in  his  actual  turning  to  God,  they  called  con- 
version, I  shall  use  both  of  these  words  in  the  sense  they  did.  Convic- 
tion is  the  presentation  of  truth  to  the  mind,  by  the  Spirit,  before  regenera- 
tion.    Sanctification  is  the  continued  work  of  the  Spirit  after  regeneration. 

It  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  light  is  necessary  to  conviction  and 
conversion.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  the  instrument  of  carrying  on  that  pre- 
paratory work  in  the  understanding  and  conscience  which  shows  the  soul 
its  ruin  and  need  of  a  Saviour,  and  fits  it  to  make  a  just  estimate  of  things, 
and  to  exercise  all  the  Christian  graces,  when  new  life  comes  to  be  infused : 
and  in  the  second  place,  it  presents  all  the  objects  towards  which  the  mind 
acts  in  conversion.  Without  the  word,  we  have  no  authority  from  the 
Bible  to  say,  there  would  ever  be  a  saving  change  on  earth. 

I  admit  also  tliat  truth  is  supernaturally  conveyed  to  the  mind  in  convic- 
tion. But  after  the  most  powerful  convictions  the  enmity  of  the  heart  often 
rages.  The  question  now  is.  Is  the  subsequent  change  in  the  temper  pro- 
duced by  the  power  of  truth  thus  seen  and  felt,  or  by  the  immediate  power  of 
God  ?     I  say  it  is  produced  by  the  immediate  power  of  God. 

The  advocates  of  the  opposite  theory  generally  speak  of  truth's  being 
employed  in  the  form  of  motives  to  regenerate  the  soul.  Now  motives  are 
for  moral  agents,  but  regeneration,  in  this  restricted  sense,  is  no  part  of 
the  treatment  of  moral  agents.     It  is  an  impression  made  upon  a  passive 


REGENERATION. 


32: 


subject,  not  as  a  reward,  nor  in  fulfilment  of  any  promise  to  the  subject 
himself,  nor  in  answer  to  his  prayers,  nor  by  his  help  or  co-operation,  but 
notwithstanding-  his  strenuous  opposition  to  the  last,  and  in  spite  of  his 
infinite  guilt.  Sanctification  on  the  other  hand,  though  an  operation  on  a 
passive  subject,  in  one  respect  belongs  to  the  treatment  of  moral  agents. 
It  is  a  gracious  and  promised  reward  for  preceding  faith  and  prayer. 
• 

I.  My  first  argument  shall  take  up  this  subject  of  motives  ;  and  I  lay 
down  this  broad  proposition,  that  nothing  can  be  a  motive  which  does  not 
meet  a  corresponding  taste.  An  invitation  to  a  feast  is  no  motive  to  one 
that  is  full,  or  whose  sickly  taste  nauseates  the  provisions.  There  must 
be  a  corresponding  taste  in  the  heart  before  truth  can  move  it  to  love. 
But  the  question  is  about  the  production  of  this  very  taste.  The  cause  of 
this  must  act  and  exhaust  itself  before  the  effect  is  produced, — before  the 
temper  ceases  to  be  carnal, — before  it  can  be  influenced  by  truth. 

If  you  say  there  is  nothing  in  the  soul  but  exercises,  and  no  taste,  temper, 
or  disposition  but  the  stated  manner  in  which  God  calls  forth  those  exer- 
cises, then  truth  can  in  no  sense  cause  love  or  hatred,  but  is  only  the  object 
towards  which  the  mind,  by  a  predisposing  power,  is  made  thus  to  act. 
Seen  and  felt  it  may  be,  and  may  produce  motions  of  conscience  and 
calculations  of  interest ;  but  why  one  mind  should  act  towards  it  in  love, 
and  another,  equally  convicted,  in  hatred,  is  not  accounted  for  by  any  thing 
in  the  truth  itself,  but  must,  upon  this  sup])osition,  be  referred  to  the  imme- 
diate power  of  God.  In  both  cases  light  is  equally  present,  and  if  it  were 
a  cause,  ought  in  both  cases  to  produce  the  same  effect.  And  how  is  it  that 
truth  makes  itself  beloved  by  a  heart  that  just  now  hated  it  ?  How  can  a 
hated  object  transform  the  hatred  into  love,  even  as  an  instrument?  If 
there  is  nothing  in  the  mind  but  exercises,  all  its  love  and  hatred  must  be 
produced  by  the  immediate  power  of  God.  There  is  nothing  to  address, 
nothing  to  work  upon  but  mind  itself, — mind  without  a  character,  without 
a  propensity  to  one  thing  rather  than  another.  In  such  a  mind  there  is  no 
cause  of  love  or  haired  ynless  you  resort  to  the  self-determining  power. 
Observe  we  are  accounting  for  the  action  of  the  mind,  and  must  find  a 
cause  previous  to  the  action.  If  there  is  no  self-determining  power  and  no 
propensity,  what  is  there  in  the  mind  to  determine  it  to  one  thing  rather 
than  another  ?  There  is  no  depravity, — what  should  make  it  hate  the 
truth  ?  there  is-  no  holy  propensity, — what  should  make  it  love  the  truth  ? 
If  God  is  not  the  immediate  cause  of  its  love  and  its  hatred,  what  is  ?  A 
mind  with  no  propensity,  no  nature,  what  should  make  it  fall  in  or  fall  out 
with  any  object,  but  God's  immediate  power  I  Exercise  after  exercise 
comes  out  without  any  cause  in  the  mind  for  its  being  love  rather  than 
hatred,  or  hatred  rather  than  love.  If  there  is  a  cause  it  must  be  in  God 
or  in  motives.  But  it  cannot  be  in  motives  where  they  are  neither  adapted 
nor  inadapted  to  tlic  mind  :  but  to  a  muid  of  no  propensity  how  can  they  be 
adapted  or  inadapted  ?  Consider  again  that  we  are  seeking  for  a  cause 
previous  to  the  action  of  the  mind, — a  mind  without  propensity, — a  mind, 
of  course,  which  neither  loves  the  truth  nor  has  any  disposition  or  tendency 


324  THE   NATIONAL    PREACHER. 

to  love  it.  To  such  a  mind  the  truth  no  more  agrees  than  to  a  mind  with 
an  opposing  temper.  How  then  can  it  cause  love  1  "  Can  two  walk 
together  except  they  be  agreed?"  How  is  it  in  the  widely- extended  and 
well  known  empire  of  taste  1  Why  do  one  set  of  objects  please  rather 
than  another  1  Every  body  will  tell  you,  because  they  are  adapted  to  the 
tastes  of  men.  But  here  is  no  taste,  and  therefore  nothing  to  which  truth 
is  adapted,  and  therefore  truth  can  be  no  cause  of  love  ;  and  for  the  same 
reason  it  can  be  no  cause  of  hatred.  Now  as  there  is  no  cause  of  love 
or  hatred  in  the  mind  before  the  exercise,  nor  yet  in  the  truth,  nor  in  any 
outward  object,  the  cause  of  both,  whatever  be  their  objects,  must  be  found 
in  the  immediate  power  of  God. 

But  there  is  a  taste  or  temper  distinct  from  exercise.     There  is  a  stated 
propensity  to  feel  and  act  thus  and  thus,  which  does  not  lie  merely  in  the 
stated  mode  of  God's  operation,  but  belongs  to  the  ma7i  and  makes  a  part 
of  his  character,  even  when  the  temper  is  not  in  exercise.     In  the  provision 
made  in  our  constitution  for  those  passions  which  depend  on  the  body,  you 
see  a  preparation  to  influence  the  future  action  of  the  heart.     As  moral 
agency  and  obligation  are  concerned,  I  know  not  that  any  difference  is 
made  if  the  predisposing  cause  is  lodged  in  the  body.     In  the  case  of  habit 
there  is  a  predisposition  contracted,  founded  on  the  law  of  association  by 
which  our  ideas  are  made  to  succeed  each  other  in  a  certain  order,  carrying 
in  their  train,  all  the  oj^erations  of  the  mind.     I  know  not  that  any  difference 
is  made  if  the  origin  of  this  order  lies  in  the  head.     Why  are  we  pleased 
with  one  object  rather  than  another  ?    The  answer  from  every  tongue  is, 
because  it  is  adapted  to  our  taste.     Who  can  doubt  that  every  man  has  a 
great  variety  of  tastes,  fitted  to  relish  a  still  greater  variety  of  objects  in 
nature,  in  art,  in  science,  in  literature,  in  business,  in  amusements,  in  so- 
ciety 1     The  long  disputed  question  about  a  standard  of  taste  turn  on  this, 
whether  in  the  race  at  large  there  is  such  a  similarity  of  constitution  as 
fits  them  to  relish  the  same  objects  and  to  be  disgusted  with  the  same. 
These  tastes,  which  exist  anterior  to  the  pleasure  or  disgust,  are  certainly 
in  the  mind,  and  are  so  connected  with  desire,  love,  hatred,  and  other  affec- 
tions as  their  cause,  that  they  must  be  referred  to  the  heart.     Allow  one  of 
this  family  of  tastes  to  stand  related  to  divine  objects,  and  I  have  found 
what  I  sought.     But  it  is  hard,  you  say,  to  suppose  a  disposition  which 
must  be  removed  by  the  Spirit  before  a  man  can  love  God :  it  looks  like  a 
chain  which  binds  him  hand  and  foot  and  destroys  obligation.     But  the 
basis  of  obligation,  which  is  none  other  than  natural  ability,  lies  in  the 
faculties  of  a  rational  soul,  and  is  not  .impaired  by  an  opposing  temper. 
And  as  to  the  necessity  of  having  the  disposition  changed,  that  only  makes 
the  man  dependant  on  God  for  regeneration,  the  same  that  he  is  if  he  has 
nothing  but  exercises.     It  is  no  harder  to  be  dependant  for  a  disposition 
than  for  affections.     Fix  in  your  mind  the  entire  consistency  between  de- 
pendance  and  obligation,  and  this  difHculty  will  vanish.     You  say  you 
cannot  conceive  what  that  temper  is.    But  you  can  conceive  of  an  appetite  of 
the  mind  antecedent  to  desire,  as  easily  as  you  can  conceive  of  an  appetite 
of  the  body  antecedent  to  hunger.     You  can  conceive  of  a  tendency  of 


REGENERATION.  325 

the  heart  to  a  certain  kind  of  exercise,  as  easily  as  you  can  conceive  of  a 
heart  prepared  to  exercise  at  all, — as  easily  as  you  can  conceive  of  an 
intellect  adapted  to  the  acquisition  of  knowledge, — as  easily  as  you  can 
conceive  of  any  faculty  of  the  mind,  or  of  the  mind  itself,  distinct  from 
exercise.  And  certainly  you  can  conceive  of  this  moral  temper  as  easily 
as  you  can  conceive  of  those  tastes  which  predispose  men  to  relish  the 
beauties  of  nature  and  art.  You  cannct  comprehend  any  of  the  operations 
of  matter  or  of  mind ;  and  if  yon  deny  whatever  you  cannot  comprehend, 
you  will  be  a  skeptic  indeed.  You  cannot  conceive  what  that  temper  is  ? 
What  then  is  talent  antecedent  to  the  action  of  intellect?  Tell  me  this 
and  I  will  tell  you  that.  And  then,  by  the  same  reasoning,  there  is  nothing 
in  intellect  but  action  ;  and  that  one  acts  more  strongly  than  another,  is  not 
to  be  ascribed  to  any  thing  in  the  mind  which  we  call  talent,  but  to  the 
immediate  power  of  God  acting  in  a  stated  way.  And  what  is  there  in 
any  faculty  of  th-e  mind  distinct  from  exercise  ?  in  imagination,  memory, 
perception,  judgment,  taste  ?  What  is  there  in  reason  ?  What  is  there  in 
mind  itself]  And  where  are  we  now?  Like  Hume  we  have  annihilated 
mind,  and  left  nothing,  as  Stewart  says,  "  but  impressions  and  ideas," — 
that  worst  extreme  in  which  Berkleianism  exploded. 

But  reason  as  we  may,  the  fact  is  before  all  men,  that  one  set  of  motives 
must  be  addressed  to  one  man  and  another  to  another,  according  to  the 
existing  temper,  which  is  calculated  upon  before  the  exercises  are  excited. 
You  say  the  calculation  is,  that  a  man  will  act  as  he  has  acted,  and  will  be 
influenced  by  such  motives  as  have  influenced  him  before  ;  that  is  all.  No, 
the  calculation  looks  beyond  action  or  feeling  to  a  causal  propensity  evinced 
by  action,  and  which  is  conceived  to  belong  to  the  man  and  to  constitute 
his  susceptibility  of  the  impression  desired.  This  is  the  common  sense  of 
mankind.  You  look  upon  a  man  as  avaricious  even  when  he  is  not  think- 
ing of  his  gains,  as  overbearing  even  when  dissolved  in  grief;  and  would 
you  manage  him,  you  adapt  your  motives  to  his  habitual  temper,  which  you 
ascribe  to  him  both  when  he  sleeps  and  when  he  wakes.  In  matters  of 
business  and  the  arts  and  in  the  selection  of  society,  we  ascribe  to  men 
diversities  of  tastes  altogether  distinct  from  acts  of  judging  and  choosing, 
and  which  we  regard  as  the  causes  of  those  acts  and  inherent  in  the  cha- 
racter. You  ascribe  to  the  sleeping  lion  the  nature  of  a  lion  and  not  of  a 
lamb.  It  was  the  old  way  of  thinking  that  every  animal  had  a  nature  and 
acted  it  out ;  "that  the  horse  acted  thus  because  it  had  the  nature  of  a  horse 
and  not  of  a  serpent ;  that  the  different  natures  of  birds,  fish,  and  worms 
were  the  causes  of  their  difierent  actions.  But  now  it  seems  there  is  no 
cause  of  any  distinctive  animal  action  m  the  animal  itself,  except  the  mere 
organization  of  brute  matter.  Sin  has  no  root  in  the  human  soul.  The 
heart  acts  so  because  it  acts  so.  To  make  depravity  the  reason  would 
only  be  to  make  a  thing  the  cause  of  itself.  'J'here  is  nothing  in  the 
fountain  which  causes  it  to  send  forth  bitter  waters  rather  than  sweet.  If 
you  say,  the  task  will  be  as  great  to  find  a  cause  for  tlie  depraved  temper, 
I  answer  :  the  well  known  process  of  induction  is  the  inferring  of  a  general 
law  from  particular  facts.    That  law,  which  is  regarded  as  the  cause  of  th« 


326  THE     NATIONAL   PREAGHEll. 

facts  arranged  under  it,  may  be  resolved  into  another  still  more  general, 
until  you  come  to  the  most  general  that  can  be  discovered.  And  for  that 
you  can  assign  no  other  reason  than  that  such  is  the  will  of  our  Creator. 
Now  the  question  is,  whether,  when  you  have  found  that  the  exercises  of 
the  heart  are  sinful,  you  have  come  to  the  most  general  conclusion  possible, 
or  whether,  from  the  universal  and  continued  exercise  of  sin,  we  may  not 
infer  a  sinful  nature  or  disposition  in  the  race,  just  as  we  infer  the  law  of 
gravitation  from  the  frequent  fall  of  heavy  bodies.  And  if  we  may,  and 
can  go  back  no  farther,  we  are  not  to  be  reproached  with  presenting  a  fact 
without  assigning  a  cause.  If  we  know  of  no  cause  beyond  but  the  First 
Cause  of  all,  it  is  exactly  what  occurs  in  every  branch  of  physical  science. 
From  repeatedly  seeing  steel  filings  drawn  towards  a  magnet,  we  infer  the 
general  law  of  magnetical  attraction.  But  if  we  are  required  to  tell  the 
cause  of  magnetical  attraction,  we  can  only  say.  Such  is  the  will  of  our 
Creator.  It  is  an  original  law  of  our  nature  to  ascribe  every  change  to  a 
cause.  The  exercises  of  our  minds  involve  a  change,  and  therefore  we 
instinctively  seek  for  a  cause  ;  and  when  we  have  traced  them  to  nature, 
which  does  not  change,  we  look  no  farther,  we  can  go  no  farther.  This  is 
more  than  common  sense,  it  is  instinct,  it  is  an  ultimate  law  of  the  human 
understanding. 

That  the  belief  of  mankind  is  what  I  have  represented  it,  is  proved  de- 
cisively from  their  language.  How  came  such  words  in  every  tongue  as 
temper  and  disposition,  if  nothing  answering  to  them  was  supposed  to  exist? 
And  it  is  still  more  certain  from  the  language  of  Scripture,  which  accom- 
modates itself  to  the  common  apprehensions  of  mankind.  That  language 
constantly  refers  to  something  in  the  mind,  good  or  bad,  which  is  anterior 
to  exercise,  and  which  gives  rise  to  all  our  feelings  and  passions.  I 
scarcely  know  how  to  make  a  selection, — it  is  found  on  every  page. 
"Whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  s,m,for  his  seed  remaineth  in 
him  and  he  cannot  sin."  "  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  Jlesh,  and 
that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit^  "  A  new  spirit  will  I  put  within 
you,  and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give 
you  a  heart  of  flesh."  "  The  spirit  that  dwelleth  in  us  lusteth  to  envy." 
"  Then  goeth  he  and  taketh  with  himself  seven  other  spirits  more  wicked 
than  himself,  and  they  enter  in  and  dwell  there."  Indeed  every  case  of 
demoniacal  possession,  indicated  a  diseased  state  of  the  mind  which  was 
the  cause  of  diseased  action.  May  I  not  strengthen  my  argument  by 
analogies  drawn  from  the  body  ?  That  has  appetites  distinct  from  the 
desires  they  occasion.  The  quenched  eye  has  impediments  to  seehig 
distinct  from  not  seeing,  and  unremovable  by  light. 

And  now  what  have  you  to  oppose  to  these  analogies,  to  the  language  of 
the  Bible,  and  to  the  language  and  common  sense  of  mankind?  Nothing  but 
a  bare  hypothesis,  namely,  that  the  mind  has  no  properties,  and  of  course  no 
powers,  but  exercise  ; — an  unsupported  hypothesis,  for  which  not  a  particle 
of  proof  can  be  adduced, — which  is  not  a  thing  that  admits  of  proof ; — a  mere 
assumption  which,  logically  or  illogically,  is  employed  to  sweep  away  some 


REGENERATION.  327 

of  the  most  important  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  such  as  the  depravity  of  in- 
fants and  supernatural  regeneration.  It  takes  the  new  creation  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  Spirit  and  ascribes  it  to  moral  suasion,  Jike  the  Pelagians  of 
other  days. 

It  is  impossible,  according  to  any  known  law  of  motives,  that  the  pre- 
*sentation  of  a  hated  object,  (hated  in  all  its  character  and  aspects,)  should 
produce  love.  You  say  the  object  may  recommend  itself  to  the  under- 
standing and  conscience,  and  so  impress  the  heart.  But  if  any  thing  is 
proved  by  the  history  of  our  world,  it  is  this,  that  the  understanding  and 
conscience  cannot  control  the  heart.  If  they  could,  men  would  always  do 
as  well  as  they  know  how,  knowledge  would  carry  reformation  wherever 
it  goes,  and  no  conscience  would  upbraid  for  present  action  in  any  world. 
But  understanding  and  conscience,  with  all  the  light  of  eternity,  will  never 
convert  a  devil. 

As  certainly  as  an  object  is  haled  in  ail  its  character  and  aspects,  it  will 
be  hated  the  more  the  more  it  is  seen.  If  it  is  hated  only  under  partial 
and  mistaken  views,  and  would  be  loved  if  seen  in  all  its  parts,  the  object 
itself,  considered  as  a  whole,  is  not  hated.  But  if  it  is  hated  as  a  whole,  it 
must  be  hated  in  proportion  to  the  clearness  with  which  it  is  seen.  What 
can  possibly  prevent?  Hatefulness  must  become  greater  hatefulness  the 
more  it  is  perceived.  God  may  make  the  heart  love  the  hated  object,  but 
the  object  itself  is  neither  cause  nor  instrument  of  the  change.  It  is  the 
occasion  of  action  of  some  sort,  but  not  the  cause  or  instrument  of  the  change 
from  hatred  to  love. 

All  the  truths  of  revelation  respect  the  character  and  government  of  God 
and  his  relations  to  us.  The  light  is  only  God  revealed.  No  such  light 
can  bring  the  natural  heart  to  love  the  character  of  God.  If  it  could,  the 
natural  heart  is  not  totally  depraved.  If  the  more  full  explanations  of  the 
divine  character  present  an  object  which  the  natural  heart  loves,  what  it 
hated  before  was  not  the  true  God,  but  a  false  image  of  God,  and  to  have 
loved  it  as  God  would  have  been  idolatry  ;  and  what  has  been  called  enmity 
against  God,  was  only  a  commendable  aversion  to  an  idol.  But  if  the 
carnal  heart  hates  the  true  God,  it  will  hate  him  the  more  the  more  he  is 
seen,  as  surely  as  it  is  governed  by  motives.  Light,  so  far  from  extinguish- 
ing the  flame'  of  rebellion,  is  only  oil  cast  upon  the  fire.  So  it  is  in  hell. 
The  more  God  is  seen  the  more  raging  is  the  enmity,  because  it  is  the  real 
character  of  God  that  they  hate.  So  it  is  with  convicted  sinners.  Never 
was  their  enmity  thus  inflamed  until  they  came  to  have  clear  ideas  of  the 
God  of  the  law.  I  have  seen  them  ready  to  gnash  with  their  teeth  but  a 
few  hours  or  even  minutes  before  they  began  the  immortal  song. 

The  impossibility  that  light  should  produce  love  to  God  before  the  heart 
is  changed  by  a  higher  influence,  appears  farther  from  the  nature  of  the 
disease.  That  consists  in  supreme  selfishness.  In  the  nature  of  things 
there  can  be  no  rivals  for  the  supreme  affection  but  God  znd  self.     Where 


328  THE    NATIONAL    rREACHER. 

God  is  not  loved  self  must  be  supreme,  and  then  the  God  of  the  law 
cannot  fail  to  be  hated,  and  hated  in  proportion  as  he  is  seen.  "When  the 
sinner  sees  God  standing  over  him  with  a  drawn  sword,  and  saying,  If  you 
do  not  love  me  better  than  yourself,  I  will  dash  those  interests  which  you 
so  dearly  love,  to  all  eternity,  he  must  hate  such  a  God  as  surely  as  he  is 
govei'ned  by  motives.  Light  cast  upon  the  milder  parts  of  the  divine  cha- 
racter, may  bribe  him  into  a  selfish  love,  but  nothing  can  make  the  whole 
character  of  a  commanding  and  condemning  God  dear  to  a  selfish  heart. 
The  temper  must  be  changed  to  that  of  disinterested  benevolence,  before 
such  an  object  can  become  a  motive  to  love.  The  change  must  be  com- 
pleted before  light  can  act.     It  cannot  therefore  be  produced  by  light. 

II.  But  notwithstanding  all  this  evidence  that  light  can  do  nothing  to  the 
canral  heart  but  inflame  its  enmity,  it  is  still  asserted  that  the  heart  is 
changed  by  the  power  inherent  in  light,  inherent  in  it  at  least  as  a  second 
cause.  "  If  I  were  as  eloquent  as  the  Holy  Ghost,  I  could  regenerate 
sinners  as  well  as  he."  As  much  as  to  say,  "  Could  I  lay  the  truth  in 
clearly  before  the  mind,  I  need  do  nothing  more,  the  Holy  Ghost  needs 
do  nothing  more  ;  the  truth  would  do  the  rest."  Whether  the  truth  does  it 
as  a  god,  (for  the  Holy  Ghost  does  nothing  more  than  put  the  truth  in,)  or 
only  as  a  second  cause  through  which  the  God  of  nature  works,  we  are 
not  told.  Give  it  the  most  favourable  construction  and  say  the  latter,  then 
regeneration,  distinct  from  conviction,  is  a  mere  natural  process. 

By  the  course  of  nature  in  the  material  world  we  unders-tand  the  action 
of  God  through  second  causes  according  to  invariable  laws.  Whether  the 
course  of  nature  in  the  world  of  mind  is  always  conducted  through  second 
causes  and  by  invariable  laws,  we  have  not  so  much  the  means  of  judging; 
though  from  analogy  we  generally  conceive  the  two  cases  to  be  alike. 
But  here  it  is  assumed  that  truth,  when  placed  in  clear  view  of  the  mind, 
will  in  all  cases  produce  the  effect  without  any  other  agent,  at  least  without 
any  other  than  that  which  acts  through  truth  as  a  second  cause.  All  be- 
yond conviction  then  is  a  pure  natural  process. 

But  you  say,  truth  is  instrumental  in  sanctification,  and  yet  the  process 
is  allowed  to  be  supernatural.  This  calls  for  a  distinct  explanation  of  the 
laws  by  which  sanctification  is  conducted. 

In  the  first  creation  there  was  a  set  of  laws  established  by  which  God 
could  statedly,  and  perhaps  invariably,  act  through  second  causes,  both  in 
the  world  of  matter  and  of  mind.  This  is  the  course  of  nature.  But  the 
whole  process  of  raising  a  world  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins  to  the  life  of 
holiness,  by  the  Holy  Ghost  procure^  for  men  by  the  atonement  and  obe- 
dience of  Christ,  is  above  nature.  And  yet,  so  far  as  this  course  belongs 
to  the  treatment  of  moral  agents,  it  is  conducted,  for  the  most  part  at  least, 
by  fixed  laws,  that  creatures  may  know  on  what  terms  they  may  hope  to 
receive,  and  may  be  governed  by  motives.  Thiere  were  therefore  in  the 
second  creation  certain  laws  established  by  which  the  supernatural  process 


REGENERATION.  3*29 

of  sanctification  might  be  carried  on  by  instruments.  Passing  over  those 
means  of  grace  which  only  bring  truth  to  the  mind,  such  as  preaching, 
sacraments,  and  dispensations  of  providence,  I  will  select  four  laws  which 
exclusively  relate  to  the  supernatural  treatment  of  holy  moral  agents,  but 
which  are  analogous  to  laws  established  for  moral  agents  in  the  first 
creation.  The  first  is,  that  both  in  conversion  and  in  the  progress  of 
"sanctification,  holy  feelings  are  called  forth  by  motives  addressed  to  a  cor- 
responding taste,  and  therefore  by  the  instrumentality  of  truth.  The  second 
is,  that  faith,  in  proportion  to  the  clearness  of  its  vision,  obtains,  by  promise, 
greater  measures  of  sanctification.  "  We  all  with  open  face  beholdmg  as 
in  a  glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are  changed  into  the  same  image  from 
glory  to  glory,  even  as  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord."  Views  of  God  are  by 
the  Spirit  made  transforming,  somewhat  after  the  manner  of  imitation,  and 
the  medium  through  which  the  views  are  obtained  is  truth.  The  third  is, 
that  desires  after  holiness,  (which  always  have  truth  for  their  object  and 
guide,)  are,  in  proportion  to  their  strength,  followed  Avith  increased  sancti- 
fication, according  to  the  promise,  "  Blessed  are  they  Avhich  do  hunger  and 
thirst  after  righteousness,  for  they  shall  be  filled."  The  fourth  is,  that 
prayer  for  the  Holy  Spirit^  (Avhich  is  always  excited  and  directed  by  truth,) 
is,  in  proportion  to  its  sincerity,  followed  with  larger  communications  of  the 
Spirit,  according  to  the  promise,  "  How  much  more  shall  your  heavenly 
Father  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him." 

All  these  laws  are  for  moral  agents, — for  holy  moral  agents, — established 
therefore  in  the  new  creation, — and  relatmg  of  course  to  supernatural 
agency.  But  none  of  them  can  apply  to  regeneration,  or  the  new  creation 
itself.  Here  the  thing  done  is  no  part  of  the  treatment  of  a  moral  agent, 
but  an  impression  upon  a  passive  subject,  not  made  as  a  reward,  nor  in  ful- 
filment of  any  promise  to  the  subject  himself,  nor  in  answer  to  his  prayers  ; 
not  brought  about  by  motives,  for  there  is  no  taste  to  which  a  holy  motive 
could  be  addressed, — no  eye  to  see  the  glory  of  God.  It  is  not  a  case 
to  which  the  laws  of  the  new  creation  can  be  applied,  for  the  new  crea- 
tion does  not  exist.  The  laws  of  nature  were  not  festablished  before  the 
first  creation,  and  these  laws  cannot  be  applied  until  the  soul  is  created 
anew  "  in  Christ  Jesus."  If  light  is  made  a  second  cause  here,  it  must 
be  according  to  the  laws  established  in  the  first  creation,  that  is,  according 
to  the  course  of  nature. 

That  the  speculations  of  the  present  day  about  the  instrumentality  of 
light,  lead  to  this  conclusion,  is  evident  from  facts  not  a  few.  Among 
others,  an  esteemed  friend  in  the  Gospel  ministry,  a  man  of  mind,  who  has 
been  perplexed  by  these  speculations,  though  he  has  not  yielded  to  them, 
lately  proposed  to  me  the  following  question  :  "  May  not  the  combined 
power  of  conscience  and  hope,  put  in  operation  by  light,  regenerate  the 
sinner  by  natural  laws  ?"  The  natural  effects  of  conscience  and  hope  he 
illustrated  by  a  murderer  humbled  by  conscience  into  a  sense  of  deserving 
the  punishment  awarded,  and  reformed  by  this  sense  and  the  offer  of  pardon 
on  condition  of  his  reformation.    In  proportion  to  his  conviction  his  enmity 


330  THE   NATIONAL   PREACHER. 

to  the  court  abates,  and  when  the  judge  recommends  him  to  mercy,  it  is 
changed  into  love.  And  if  human  law  and  pardon  can  do  so  much,  can- 
not God's  law  and  Gospel,  working  on  conscience  and  hope,  produce  a 
still  more  radical  change  ?  "  As  to  devils,"  he  adds,  "  I  know  nothing  that 
forbids  the  belief  that  they  experience  all  that  conscience  would  thus  pro- 
duce by  light,  in  utter  despair ;  hope  making  the  only  and  immense  difl'er- 
ence  between  them  and  the  human  believer."  He  then  asks  this  sweeping 
question :  "  May  not  the  language  of  the  Scriptures  respecting  the  agency 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  regeneration,  be  as  compatible  with  this  view  of  the 
process,  as  the  biblical  forms  of  speech  respecting  the  acts  of  Providence 
are  with  the  natural  and  invariable  operations  of  the  laws  of  matter  and 
mind  ?" 

To  all  this  I  say,  (1.)  That  this  murderer's  love  was  only  selfish  ;  for  as 
to  any  other,  "  If  a  man  would  give  all  the  substance  of  his  house  for  love, 
it  would  utterly  be  contemned."  When  we  love  God  "  because  he  first 
loved  us,"  it  is  moral  excellence  that  we  love  ;  and  that  cannot  be  loved 
but  by  a  holy  heart.  That  a  selfish  heart  should  be  moved  by  kindness, 
is  nothing  new  ;  but  that  it  should  be  made  holy  by  that  kindness  which 
pleases  a  selfish  spirit,  is  a  theory  which  makes  holiness  itself  selfish. 
You  say  it  is  not  selfishness  but  self-love  that  is  addressed.  But  self-love 
is  necessarily  selfishness  when  it  is  supreme,  as  it  is  in  every  unregenerate 
man.  (2.)  The  law  of  God  comes  indeed  with  greater  authorhy  and  purity 
and  sanctions  than  the  laws  of  men.  It  therefore  presents  greater  motives. 
But  as  no  motives  can  change  the  carnal  temper,  or  transform  the  action 
of  the  heart  from  hatred  to  love,  the  law  and  Gospel  of  God,  no  more  than 
the  law  and  mercies  of  men,  can  prevail  without  the  Spirit.  (3.)  Accord- 
ing to  this  hypothesis,  the  Gospel  proclaimed  in  hell  would  convert  every 
devil  without  the  Holy  Spirit.  (4.)  According  to  this  construction  of  the 
language  of  Scripture,  what,  I  ask,  is  the  office  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
since  all  is  done  by  the  God  of  nature  ?  and  why  is  so  much  said  in  the 
Bible  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  and  of  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit,  in  reference  to 
regeneration  and  sanctification,  any  more  than  in  reference  to  the  fruits  of  the 
earth  and  a  thousand  natural  changes  upon  mind  ?  The  very  ascription  of 
this  work  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  comes  in  the  room  of  a  hundred  arguments  to 
prove  it  supernatural.  The  Trinity  is  unknown  to  nature, — is  above  nature, 
— is  brought  into  use  and  revealed  in  that  great  work  which  was  unneeded 
when  the  laws  of  nature  were  established,  the  results  of  which  are  called  a 
new  creation,  the  new  heavens  and  new  earth.  No  provision  was  made  in 
nature  for  the  Spirit  to  come  to  our  world  after  the  fall.  The  race  were 
sentenced  to  the  curse  of  perpetual  abandonment ;  and  without  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ  the  Spirit  could  not  come  to  men  consistently  with  the 
honour  of  the  law,  and  now  comes  as  the  reward  of  his  obedience  and  in 
fulfilment  of  his  covenant  claims.  The  mission  and  operations  of  the  Spirit 
therefore  cannot  belong  to  nature,  unless  the  mission,  atonement,  and  obe- 
dience of  Christ  belonged  to  nature.  Now  though  Christ's  mission,  birth, 
and  mediation  were  above  nature,  yet  he  adapted  himself  to  the  nature  of 
man  in  his  instructions,  in  his  manner  of  address,  in  the  proofs  of  his 


RBGENEBATION.  331 

mission,  and  therefore  in  his  very  miracles.  His  death  itself  was  accord- 
ing to  nature,  though  its  influence  on  the  destinies  of  the  world  was  above 
nature.  It  is  no  evidence  therefore  that  a  thing  is  not  above  nature  in  its 
origin  and  power,  because  in  its  course  of  operation  it  coincides  with 
nature.  The  Spirit  so  far  adapts  himself  to  the  nature  of  man  that  he  co- 
operates with  modes  of  address  suited  to  that  nature  •  otherwise  ministers 
and  Christians,  in  addressing  others,  would  have  no  encouragement  to 
adopt  the  manner  which  their  zeal  dictates  and  which  their  judgment  sees 
adapted  to  the  nature  of  their  hearers.  He  employs  light  to  convince,  and 
motives,  addressed  to  a  corresponding  taste,  to  move  the  mind.  All  these 
things  belonging  to  the  treatment  of  moral  agents,  are  conducted  by  laws 
analogous  to  those  established  for  moral  agents  in  the  first  creation.  But 
this  by  no  means  weakens  the  proof  that  the  power  which  he  exerts  in 
changing  the  temper  of  an  enemy  to  that  of  a  friend,  not  by  motives  ad- 
dressed to  a  moral  agent,  but  by  an  impression  upon  one  who  certainly  is 
passive  in  receiving  it,  is  supernatural.  It  was  proper  that  the  whole  treat- 
ment of  moral  agents, — the  government,  the  means  of  instruction,  convic- 
tion, and  persuasion, — should  be  adapted  to  their  nature,  under  both  the 
original  constitution  and  the  new ;  but  the  power  which  gives  eflect  to  mo- 
tives and  persuasions  by  an  operation  on  a  depraved  heart,  belongs  not  to 
the  God  of  nature,  but  to  one  of  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity,  denominated 
the  Holy  Ghost  because  the  Author  of  holiness  in  fallen  man. 

If  the  power  acted  through  the  laws  of  nature  it  would  be  uniform,  and 
a  person  acquainted  with  all  the  natural  laws  of  matter  and  mind,  and 
knowing  those  which  would  be  brought  into  action  in  a  certain  case,  could 
infallibly  predict  the  result.  Why  then  do  persons,  the  most  stubborn  and 
the  most  exposed  to  temptation  and  the  farthest  removed  from  the  means 
of  grace,  often  become  Christians,  while  others,  the  most  favoured  through 
life,  die  in  their  sins  ?  And  why  are  men,  without  any  apparent  natural 
cause,  suddenly  convicted  and  converted?  And  why  is  a  whole  town 
roused,  and  hundreds  converted  in  a  few  weeks,  by  an  influence  whose 
beginning  had  been  working  for  months  in  twenty  different  minds  unknown 
to  each  other,  and  without  the  possibility  of  being  traced  to  any  natural 


There  are  changes  in  the  disposition  which  are  brought  about  by  natural 
laws  ;  but  these  are  all  gradually  produced,  except  in  the  single  case  where 
the  change  arises  from  a  sudden  affection  of  the  body.  But  here  is  the 
greatest  of  all  changes  produced  in  an  instant :  for  it  can  be  proved  that  a 
man  is  an  enemy  to  God  until  he  loves  him  supremely,  and  therefore  must 
leap  from  one  state  to  the  other  in  a  moment. 

This  change  is  set  forth  in  Scripture  under  emblems  and  names  of  things 
wholly  supernatural ;  such  as  a  new  creation,  a  new  birth,  a  resurrection, 
the  miraculous  opening  of  eyes  and  ears.  Allowing  regeneration  in  these 
passages  to  be  taken  in  its  widest  sense,  can  it  be  supposed  that  the  super- 
natural part  is  confined  to  conviction  and  conversion  ?     That  these  two  are 


332  THE    NATIONAL    PREACUKR. 

supernatural  I  admit  and  mamtain ;  but  surely  the  change  of  the  temper, 
so  that  it  shall  regularly  send  forth,  at  the  bidding  of  motives,  supreme 
love  to  God,  where,  before,  the  same  motives  called  forth  nothing  but 
enmity,  is  much  the  most  wonderful  part  of  the  general  change.  Shall 
this  be  pronounced  the  mere  effect  of  light  operating  invariably  as  a  second 
cause  1     This  would, 

III.  Detract  greatly  from  the  glory  of  God's  power  in  regeneration. 
It  would  make  the  change  no  more  evincive  of  special  power  than  resto- 
ration to  health  or  the  taming  of  the  wildness  of  youth.  All  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  does  upon  this  supposition,  is  to  hold  truth  to  the  conscience  and 
heart,  and  when  the  sinner  struggles  to  get  away,  to  press  it  upon  him, 
until  the  truth  by  its  own  power,  (which  you  say  is  God  acting  statedly 
through  that  second  cause,)  prevails.  What  then  is  the  office  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  this  thing,  distinct  from  the  God  of  nature  ?  Between  that  thumb 
and  finger  I  hold  a  candle  to  a  wet  board,  and  keep  it  there  against  all 
attempts  to  remove  it,  until  the  board  is  dried  and  inflamed  and  consumed. 
Does  that  thumb  and  finger  represent  all  that  the  Holy  Ghost  does  in 
regeneration,  beyond  what  is  done  by  the  God  of  nature  acting  through 
truth  ?  That  holding  of  truth  to  the  mind  is  only  conviction.  The  Holy 
Ghost  then  does  nothing  but  convict,  and  truth  regenerates.  Where  then 
is  the  exhibition  of  mighty  power?  The  change  is  spoken  of  as  a 
manifestation  of  as  great  power  as  the  first  creation.  "  For  God  who 
commanded  the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  hath  shined  in  our  hearts,  to 
give, the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus 
Christ."  It  is  spoken  of  as  a  manifestation  of  no  less  power  than  the 
resurrection  and  exaltation  of  Christ.  "  The  eyes  of  your  understanding 
being  enlightened,  that  ye  may  know — what  is  the  exceeding  greatness  of  his 
power  to  us-ward  who  believe,  according  to  the  working  of  his  mighty 
power  which  he  wrought  in  Christ  when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead  and 
set  him  at  his  own  right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places."  Now  is  this  mar- 
vellous power  confined  to  the  mere  work  of  conviction  1  Thousands  are 
convicted,  apparently  as  much  as  those  who  soon  afterwards  are  subdued, 
and  yet  turn  back ;  and  no  one  speaks  of  the  mighty  power  manifested  in 
their  case.  Or  is  it  in  conversion  that  this  wondrous  power  chiefly  ap- 
pears ?  But  this  calling  forth  of  holy  exercises  by  motives  addressed  to 
a  taste  already  holy,  evinces  no  greater  power  than  the  whole  process  of 
sanctification.  But  no  such  emphasis  is  laid  on  sanctification  as  indicative 
of  mighty  power.  The  greatness  of  the  manifestation  lies  in  subduing  an 
enemy,  and  the  chief  point  consists  in  breaking  his  temper. 

But  you  say,  these  texts  do  speak  of  the  power  of  God  in  sanctification. 
Then  your  cause  is  lost.  For  if  sanctification  evinces  so  much  power, 
none  will  pretend  that  regeneration  discovers  less. 

But  I  seem  to  hear  you  say  again.  It  is  none  the  less  the  power  of  God 
t)ecause  it  acts  through  a  second  cause  :  what  is  the  influence  of  a  second 
«ause  but  the  stated  action  of  divine  power  1    This  is  probably  true  of 


REGENERATION.  333 

physical  or  material  causes,  but  not  of  such  a  cause  as  truth.  Although 
physical  causes  and  their  essential  properties  must  be  allowed  to  have  a 
real  existence,  or,  like  Berkeley,  we  blot  out  the  material  universe ;  yet, 
so  far  as  man  can  see,  they  are  nothing  but  stated  antecedents,  and  their 
influence  is  only  the  stated  action  of  divine  power,  and  nothing  intervenes 
between  that  power  and  the  effect.  All  this  is  generally  admitted  by 
philosophers  of  second  causes  in  the  material  world ;  but  truth  is  quite 
a  different  thing,  as  I  hope  presently  to  show.  In  the  mean  time  it  is 
sufficient  to  say,  that  the  power  of  God  acting  statedly  through  a  second 
cause,  is  only  what  we  see  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature. 

IV.  But  it  seems  utterly  impossible  that  light  should  in  any  way  be  a 
second  cause  of  this  change,  or  that  God  should  act  through  it  as  he  does 
through  a  physical  cause.  There  seems  no  conceivable  way  in  which 
light  can  operate  even  as  an  instrument,  but  these  four :  first,  by  being  the 
natural  means  of  doctrinal  belief  and  knowledge  ;  secondly,  by  being  the 
instrument  of  supernatural  conviction,  and,  as  a  consequence,  awaking 
natural  remorse,  fear,  desire,  and  the  like  ;  thirdly,  by  drawing  forth  holy 
affections  from  a  holy  heart ;  fourthly,  by  calling  forth  from  a  selfish  heart, 
enmity,  and  in  its  perverted  forms  and  misapplications,  hope,  joy,  love,  and 
various  other  passions.  Can  you  conceive  of  a  fifth  way  in  which  it  can  act  ? 
in  which  it  can  change  the  natural  temper  ?  What  is  that  way  ?  Look  at 
the  thing  on  every  side  and  tell  me. 

But  you  say.  Rein  me  not  up  so  close.  If  I  camiot  tell  how,  the  Scrip- 
tures pronounce  the  fact,  and  your  reasoning  is  only  philosophy.  But  the 
Scriptures  do  not  pronounce  any  fact  in  opposition  to  my  theory.  They 
sometimes  speuk  of  regeneration  in  the  larger  sense,  as  comprehending 
conversion  and  perhaps  conviction,  and  then  make  the  Gospel  the  mstru- 
ment  of  the  general  change:  To  this  I  fully  agree.  But  if  a  question  is 
raised  about  the  cause  which  changes  the  natural  temper,  no  text  of  Scrip- 
ture, I  believe,  contradicts  the  view  which  I  have  given.  I  press  you  then 
to  tell  me  how  light  can  possibly  be  a  second  cause,  or  even  an  instrument, 
of  this  change.  ^ 

I  admit  however,  what  philosophers  generally  allow,  that  in  the  physical 
world  it  is  impossible  to  comprehend  how  any  one  of  two  events  proceeds 
from  the  other  as  its  cause,  or  in  another  department,  how  the  will  moves 
the  body.  Nor  can  we  any  better  comprehend  how  the  First  Cause  pro- 
duces its  effects.  Yet  we  must  not,  on  account  of  this  ignorance,  say  that 
any  thing  may  be  the  cause  of  any  thing.  A  physical  cause  is  defined  to 
be  a  stated  antecedent,  through  which  God  acts  so  uniformly  that  from  the 
cause  we  may  infer  the  effect.  Thus  if  we  see  fire  falling  upon  powder, 
we  may  confidently  expect  an  explosion.  In  supernatural  operations  I 
know  not  whether  I  ought  to  speak  of  second  causes ;  but  even  here  the 
course  is  so  far  regular  and  adapted  to  the  known  constitution  of  things, 
that  we  can  judge  what  are  and  Avhat  arc  not  instruments.  Not  every 
antecedent  is  an  instrument,  even  when  it  is  a  professed  harbinger  of  the 


334  THE    NATIONAL   PREACHER. 

event.  Thus  Moses'  rod,  though  purposely  stretched  out  over  the  sea,  waa 
in  no  sense  the  instrument  by  which  the  vcaters  vi^ere  divided.  This  was 
done  as  much  by  the  immediate  power  of  God  as  though  there  had  been 
no  antecedent.  There  was  no  stated  influence  lodged,  or  apparently  lodged, 
in  the  antecedent.  So,  though  conviction  by  the  instrumentality  of  truth 
precedes  regeneration,  for  purposes  obviously  distinct  from  any  causality  in 
the  change,  we  must  not  assign  to  that  antecedent  the  power  of  a  second 
cause  or  instrument  if  in  no  conceivable  way  it  can  act  as  such.  We  can 
easily  apprehend  the  fact  that  light  can  produce  belief  and  knowledge, 
can  work  conviction,  can  call  forth  holy  exercises  from  a  holy  heart,  can  call 
forth  enmity  from  a  heart  unholy ;  but  how  it  can  change  the  hostile 
temper,  no  man  can  tell,  no  man  can  conceive.  It  certainly  has  no  per- 
ceivable tendency  that  way.  It  cannot  influence  the  event  according  to 
any  law  by  which  second  causes  are  known  to  act.  In  a  physical  cause 
there  is  to  all  appearance  an  inherent  power ;  and  God's  stated  mode  of 
action  is  so  much  in  a  line  with  it,  that  we  commonly  call  it  the  action  of 
the  second  cause ;  and  it  requires  a  mind  well  disciplined  by  philosophy 
to  see  that  the  power  does  not  reside  in  the  stated  antecedent.  So  when 
truth  is  brought  into  clear  view  of  a  mind  which  God  has  prepared,  it  acts 
or  seems  to  act  by  its  own  inherent  power.  Nothing  but  the  truth  is  seen, 
nothing  but  the  truth  is  felt.  But  where  is  there  any  such  apparent  tendency 
in  truth  to  change  the  carnal  temper  ?  where  more  than  in  loathed  provisions  to 
transmute  the  aversion  to  relish  I  Though  unable  to  explain  the  action  of 
second  causes,  we  may  very  often  know  that  an  antecedent  is  not  a  second 
cause.  You  may  build  a  fence  before  you  sow  your  seed,  and  that  erection 
may  be  a  stated  antecedent,  but  we  know  it  was  not  the  cause  of  the  crop. 
The  birth  of  the  father  is  a  stated  antecedent  to  the  birth  of  the  son,  but 
not  a  physical  cause. 

But  you  say,  though,  like  a  physical  cause,  truth  can  do  nothing  itself, 
yet  God  can  give  it  energy  by  acting  upon  it  as  "  the  sword  of  the  Spirit," 
or  acting  through  it  as  he  does  through  a  physical  cause.  God  act  upon 
truth  !  What  possible  meaning  can  there  be  to  such  an  expression  ?  God 
produces  truth  by  bringing  to  pass  those  facts  and  relations  which  are  the 
subjects  of  it.  He  can  produce  new  truths  by  giving  existence  to  new  facts 
and  relations,  and  can  make  a  proposition  which  was  true  of  a  subject  yes- 
terday, not  true  to-day,  by  changing  that  subject.  But  what  has  become 
truth,  cannot,  while  continuing  such,  be  changed  in  nature  or  form  or  pushed 
from  place  to  place.  Of  physical  causes  God  does  indeed  uphold  the 
existence  and  properties  by  acting  on  them,  and  as  their  influence  is  only 
the  stated  exertion  of  his  power,  he  acts  through  them.  Not  so  with  truth. 
Truth  is  what  it  is,  and  God  can  neither  take  from  it  nor  add  to  it,  but  by 
changing  the  relations  of  things.  The  doctrines  it  contains,  after  being 
made  true  by  the  relations  established  in  thmgs,  have  in  themselves,  and 
without  deriving  it  from  any  being,  such  a  tendency  to  aflect  a  given  temper 
as  Ihey  have.  No  being  can  add  any  thought  or  relation  of  thoughts, 
(without  changing  the  relation  of  things,) — any  energy  or  any  property 
whatever,  not  found  in  them  before.     Truth,  in  this  sense,  is  eternal  and 


REGENERATION.  335 

imnautable.  God  no  more  upholds  the  existence  and  properties  of  divine 
truth,  (aside  from  sustaining  the  rehitions  of  things,)  than  he  supports  the 
eternal  relations  of  mathematical  verities.  But  it  is  not  for  him  to  create 
or  destroy  the  truth  that  two  and  two  make  four.  If  any  thing  is  done  to 
carry  divine  truth  to  the  mind,  it  must  be  done  by  an  operation,  not  on  truth, 
but  on  the  mind  itself.  This  is  done  even  in  sanctification.  Where 
•truth  is  really  made  an  instrument,  the  power  is  not  exerted  on  truth  but  on 
the  mind.  As  it  is  however  the  truths  of  the  word  which  enter  the  soul  in 
conversion,  the  word  is  called  "  the  sword  of  the  Spirit ;"  but  the  hand 
which  introduces  it  is  not  applied  to  the  sword  to  open  a  passage  for  itself, 
but  to  the  heart  to  remove  its  seven-fold  plates  of  brass.  What  is  it  that 
keeps  truth  from  the  conscience  and  heart  of  a  stupid  sinner  under  the  Gospel? 
Nothing  but  unbelief,  arising  from  hatred  of  the  truth.  As  then  the  hin- 
drance lies  in  the  heart  and  not  in  the  truth,  where  but  to  the  heart  should 
the  removing  power  be  applied  ?  And  what  sailh  the  Scripture  ?  Not,  "  1 
will  exert  my  power  upon  truth,"  but,  "  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart 
out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  a  heart  of  flesh." 

Nor  is  there  any  conceivable  way  in  which  God  can  act  through  truth, 
as  he  does  through  physical  causes  whose  influence  is  only  the  stated  exer- 
tion of  his  power.  The  power  of  truth  is  its  own,  and  all  that  can  be  done 
besides  presenting  it,  is  to  prepare  the  mind  to  feel  and  love  it  and  act 
under  its  influence, — its  own  proper  influence  after  the  mind  is  thus  pre- 
pared. 

In  this  respect  truth  is  altogether  different  from  a  second  cause  in  nature. 
And  it  is  different  in  another  respect,  which  renders  the  application  to  it  of 
the  name  of  second  cause  of  doubtful  propriety,  even  when  it  is  used  as  an 
instrument.  The  stated  antecedents  in  nature  are  called  second  causes 
because  to  a  superficial  view  they  possess  the  whole  power  which  produces 
the  effect.  But  truth  surrounds  itself  with  no  such  shadow  of  an  efficient 
cause.  It  holds  out  no  appearance  of  power  beyond  its  own.  It  drops 
indeed  its  own  underived,  influence  upon  a  heart  which  God  has  prepared ; 
but,  of  two  convicted  men,  it  pretends  not  to  make  the  difference  between 
him  that  loves  and  him  that  hates  itself.  By  a  power  upon  the  mind  it  is 
made,  in  conviction,  conversion,  and  sanctification,  to  penetrate  the  soul 
like  a  sword,  and  seems  exactly  entitled  to  the  name  of  instrument. 

In  short,  as  truth  cannot  change  the  natural  temper  as  a  second  cause, 
and  as  God  cannot  help  out  its  power  but  by  acting  upon  the  mind,  (and 
thus  really  doing  the  work  without  it,)  it  caimot  succeed  in  any  way. 

Objection  I. — Upon  this  plan  there  is  little  encouragement  to  the  unre- 
generate  to  put  themselves  in  the  way  of  the  means  of  grace,  or  to  the 
people  of  God  to  present  truth  before  them. 

Answer. — There  is  every  encouragement  that  there  nan  be  on  any  plan. 
Unless  there  is  a  body  of  truth  formed  in  their  understanding  by  the  word  of 


336  THE    NA.TIONAL    PREACHER. 

God,  and  deeply  impressed  upon  their  conscience  by  the  convicting  Spirit, 
they  are  not  prepared  to  exercise  a  new  heart  should  it  be  given  them,  and 
we  have  no  authority  to  say  that  it  will  in  any  case  be  given  them,  and  we 
know  that  as  a  general  rule  it  will  not  be  given  them.  Without  instruction 
and  conviction  therefore  by  the  truths  of  God,  there  is  no  reason  to  expect 
that  the  Spirit  will  ever  change  their  hearts.  And  when  their  hearts  are 
changed,  without  truth  before  them  there  are  no  objects  towards  which 
they  can  exercise  their  new  affections.  Here  are  reasons  as  pressing  as 
upon  any  plan  to  drive  smners  to  the  means  of  grace,  and  to  persuade 
Christians  to  follow  them  with  the  sublime  and  awful  and  winning  verities 
of  the  Gospel. 

Objection  II.  But  this  is  dwelling  so  much  on  their  passiveness  and  so 
little  on  their  obligations  immediately  to  accept  the  Gospel !  is  contem- 
plating them  so  much  as  mere  tablets  and  so  little  as  agents  who  are  to  be 
assailed  by  "  the  sword  of  the  Spirit"  ! 

Answer.  I  said  in  the  outset  that  they  are  both  passive  and  active. 
This  question  respects  them  in  their  passive  relation.  But,  as  much  in  one 
view  as  the  other,  it  leaves  them  complete  moral  agents,  bound  by  eveiiy 
obligation  to  give  their  hearts  to  God  at  once.  As  much  in  one  view  as 
the  other,  the  pressure  of  their  obligations  is  the  direct  and  most  powerful 
means  to  convince  them  of  their  guilt  and  ruin  and  bring  them  to  the  feet 
of  their  King.  That  is,  while  we  are  pressing  them  with  their  obligations 
and  demerits,  and  urging  them  to  a  Saviour's  arms,  that  is  the  time  when 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  most  likely  to  transform  the  rock  to  flesh,  to  quell  them 
into  submission  and  draw  them  out  to  Christ.  All  this  is  true,  and  reveals 
the  very  process  whose  outward  front  has  given  colour  to  that  notion  of 
instrumentality  which  I  am  opposing.  All  this  is  true,  and  warrants  me 
before  I  stop  to  turn  full  upon  the  enemies  of  God,  and  say,  O  rebels,  drop 
those  weapons  from  your  bloody  hands.  Infinite  obligations  press  you  to 
this.  Eternal  plagues  await  a  moment's  delay.  Almighty  love  has  dropped 
around  you  from  the  skies,  and  written  its  claims  in  the  bloody  inscrip- 
tions of  Calvary.  Heaven  pleads  as  though  itself  were  to  suffer.  Com- 
passion has  wept  her  ocean  full.  0  sinner,  drop  that  murderous  spear  that 
would  open  all  his  wounds  afresh.  Tear  out  that  heart  that,  imless  bribed 
by  prosperity  and  hope  or  stupified  by  ignorance  or  unbelief,  is  foaming  with 
the  rage  of  a  devil.  All  that  is  great,  all  that  is  good,  all  that  is  lovely 
and  tender,  bends  to  implore  you.  O  submit,  or  it  shall  be  written  on 
the  broad  side  of  heaven  and  on  every  corner  of  the  universe,  that  for 
that  hour's  refusal  you  deserve  eternal  fire.     Amen. 


jmmm^ 


7^'^ 


>^r 


*  % 


^rT)^/.. 


